This law, which man possesses in his conscience, does not stop half way
in its exactions from man since it aims at perfection, it commands man
to love his neighbour, and to do good even to his enemy. To love and to
do acts of kindness when pleasant to oneself is natural, and requires
no command, but, otherwise, a law is required to coerce the will, the
man who submits is free, since he can choose to infringe or to obey it;
obedience to the moral law constitutes duty, which must be accomplished
because it is our duty, and embodies the satisfaction felt in its
performance.
Man is under an obligation to be moral and to do his duty, but not
necessarily to be happy, yet he demands happiness. The union of virtue
and happiness being the _summum bonum_, we must acknowledge the
existence of a power external to ourselves, endowed with intellect
and will, which makes this union possible; this power is known to us
by the name of God. The perfect good is holiness; this life is too
short to enable us to attain to it in its perfection, it is therefore
a necessity that our life should be prolonged beyond the term of years
spent on this earth, thus we are assured of the survival of the soul
after what we term death.
Thus Kant speaks in his _Critique of Practical Reason_.
I may now be permitted to speak and give my own opinion. I hear the
Positivist perhaps say: “This result might be considered conceivable
if all that has been previously said were true; but to infer from the
desire for happiness that a supernatural power must infallibly satisfy
it might be a hallucination, or at least a hypothesis.” If this were
so we need not deride hypotheses; in the domain of human knowledge
reason would not be itself if it never made ventures in scientific
discoveries; its path starts from the possible in making excursions
from the known to the unknown, in going from darkness to light--hence
then hypothesis.
There is also this fact to notice, some of the most important of our
acts are not guided by reason, it acts as a spectator; for instance,
reason is not active when we have perception of an object, and
intuitions occur in us without the intervention of reason.
This was well understood by certain men who have come forward from time
to time from the multitude, the bearers of inspired messages to the
world; they have spoken of those things which “eye hath not seen nor
ear heard,” and they were hard to be understood of the people; but each
one alike said: “I give no proof of the truth of what I assert; do as I
say, and you will know the truth of my words.”
There remains little more to be said on the subject of Kant. There is
a serious omission in the system of this profound thinker.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account